Madras High Court
Ramasamy vs Sivabakiyavathi on 8 December, 2021
CMP.No.15614/2021 in AS.SR.No.33152/2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.12.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
CMP.No.15614/2021 in AS.SR.No.33152/2020
[Hybrid Mode]
Ramasamy .. Petitioner /
Appellant
Vs.
1.Sivabakiyavathi
2.Suresh Kumar
3.Dhanalakshmi
RR1 to 3 represented by the
Power of Attorney Kandasamy
4.S.K.Balasubramaniyam
5.Chellammal
6.Manthiri Kumar
7.the District Collector
Thumbakuruchi,
Tiruchencode Road,
Namakkal.
8,The Tahsildar
Padamudipalayam
Paramathi Velur Taluk
Namakkal District.
9.The District Revenue Officer
National Highway Authority of India
Namakkal District Collector Office Campus
Namakkal District. .. Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1
CMP.No.15614/2021 in AS.SR.No.33152/2020
Prayer in CMP.No.15614/2021:- Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act and Order 41 Rule 3[A] CPC to condone
the delay of 1039 days in filing the present Appeal Suit against the
judgment and decree passed in OS.No.1/2011 dated 23.12.2016 on the file
of the learned Additional District Judge, at Namakkal pending disposal of
the above First Appeal.
Prayer in the AS.SR.No.33152/2021:- Appeal Suit filed under Section 96
CPC read with Order 41 Rule 1 CPC against the judgment and decree
dated 23.12.2016 made in OS.No.1/2011 on the file of the learned
Principal District Judge at Namakkal.
For Petitioner/Appellant : Mr.Deepan Udhay
For RR 1 to 3 : Mr.G.Murugendran
JUDGMENT
(1) Though notice sent to the 5th respondent was returned with an
endorsement ''refused'', it is deemed that service has been completed
against the 5th respondent. As regards respondents 1 to 3, a counsel
has entered appearance. Notice to respondents 6 to 8 were returned
for ''incorrect address''. Since the contesting respondents were
CMP.No.15614/2021 in AS.SR.No.33152/2020
served, this Court is inclined to dispose of the above Civil
Miscellaneous Petition on merits.
(2) The present Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to condone the
delay of 1039 days in filing the Appeal Suit as against the judgment
and decree dated 23.12.2016 passed in OS.No.1/2011 on the file of
the learned Additional District Judge, Namakkal.
(3) Except stating the details about the relief granted by the Lower
Court and the contents of the written statement denying the
averments in the plaint, the petitioner has not assigned any reason
for the huge and inordinate delay of 1039 days in filing the Appeal
Suit. It is stated that the delay caused in filing the Appeal Suit is
neither wilful nor wanton but due to bona fide reason stated supra.
However, no reason is given in the earlier paragraphs in the
affidavit filed in support of this miscellaneous petition.
(4) When the petitioner has filed the Appeal Suit with a huge and
inordinate delay, there must be an attempt at least to explain the
delay to the satisfaction of the Court.
(5) Since no reason is stated for the delay, this Court cannot exercise its
discretion in favour of the petitioner herein.
CMP.No.15614/2021 in AS.SR.No.33152/2020
(6) In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed.
Consequently, the Appeal Suit is rejected at the SR Stage.
08.12.2021
AP
Internet : Yes
To
1.Additional District Judge
Namakkal.
2.Section Officer, VR Section,
High Court.
CMP.No.15614/2021 in AS.SR.No.33152/2020
S.S.SUNDAR, J.,
AP
CMP.No.15614/2021 in AS.Sr.No.33152/2020
08.12.2021
